Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Aug 2014
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by WMC51
3.5 and 5e have an open license. If tot read it and follow those rules you should be play. Basically forgotten realms and lore is off limits. Spell and skill names etc should be open game I believe. You just hand to read it yourself and put required legal jargon with anything you publish.


Does look like it's OGL, though I find it a bit confusing with all the legalese what aspects are actually protected. For example, I'm not entirely sure if I could make a spell called Bigby's Hand, since the proper name "Bigby" might be protected. I think I'll just play it safe and rename and reflavorize everything. I'm not particularly invested in DND 5E anyway. More just drawing inspiration from it at this point.

Last edited by Baardvark; 10/08/17 04:50 AM.
Joined: Jun 2017
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jun 2017
For mages/clerics/sorcerers you had the solution there, Baarvark. Best option would be a new menu window to select dairy spells and uses, and then when they use a bed/matress/activate rest all objectspells are deleted and the proper ones are adde to the player's quickbar, you can't trade nor throw away the objectspells. Number of objectspells/uses is based on player's intelligence (mage), charisma (sorcerer/paladin/bard) or wisdom (cleric/druid). Also magic items like some rings/amulets can add spells per levels.

Doing that we'd have a proper magic dnd system in divinity.
Problem would be, of course, the list of spells and their effects. That's something we should look into spell-by-spell

Joined: Jun 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Baardvark
Originally Posted by WMC51
3.5 and 5e have an open license. If tot read it and follow those rules you should be play. Basically forgotten realms and lore is off limits. Spell and skill names etc should be open game I believe. You just hand to read it yourself and put required legal jargon with anything you publish.


Does look like it's OGL, though I find it a bit confusing with all the legalese what aspects are actually protected. For example, I'm not entirely sure if I could make a spell called Bigby's Hand, since the proper name "Bigby" might be protected. I think I'll just play it safe and rename and reflavorize everything. I'm not particularly invested in DND 5E anyway. More just drawing inspiration from it at this point.


That is the correct approach indeed.

Joined: Jun 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2014
I cannot stress how much I support this idea. An extra layer of complexity and greater rewards for specialisation are likely they ways to go.

Joined: Jan 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2015
Good to know I'm not the only one who thought of something like that. And while I'm a lot more into the 3.5e, it's still an interesting project. This was pretty much my first thought when dos2 was announced especially with the, imho, subpar "armor"-system. Really, as much as I like the first game the basic mechanics and their missing depth hampered the game a lot for me. So yeah, I like the idea and the ambitions toward that goal.
Though I'd go for 3.5e or TDE/DSA (the dark eye/das schwarze Auge).

But as I had a look at the first game the problem would be to give it a satisfying outcome/realisation...
So far I did not look at the files of DOS2 myself, so I cannot say if it is possible to define/change more things like custom kinds of damage for example. I really hope so, especially as modding was a stretchgoal, but tbh... I had quite some letdowns with DOS2 so far... so I'm not all too hopeful...

Same goes for things like the classes, as that would mean changing the UI (in a major way!), and that alone was a No-Go in DOS1, not counting the small UI changes, like fonts etc, that were.
Man I really hope they listened at least to the stuff people said regarding the modding... especially the part about less hardcoding.

Just filling up all the stuff that's not possible to do with existing mechanics, for example defining classes as the already existing schools, definately would not do the trick for me.

Last edited by Seelenernter; 13/09/17 09:11 AM.

Think for yourself! Or others will do it...
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: UK
T
stranger
Offline
stranger
T
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: UK
i must admit,after watching Lars and the guys doing the D&D demo at WOTC studios. i thought about how much can be done with this game as far as D&D/Pathfinder are concerned...if either of the pathfinder adventure paths..Mummys mask or crimsone throne.could be loosely converted to this game..what an amazing thing that would be!.plus imagine the status and popularity this game would get!!

Last edited by tootz; 14/09/17 05:27 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
M
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Sep 2016
Any ideas on how difficult it will be to rename combat and civil abilities? I hope we are able to add and subtract entries, as well--my campaign doesn't really need Polymorph.


Joined: Aug 2014
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Melgrimm
Any ideas on how difficult it will be to rename combat and civil abilities? I hope we are able to add and subtract entries, as well--my campaign doesn't really need Polymorph.



Should be very easy to rename combat/civil abilities. Not positive if that information is only found in the main localization file like in the first game, or if it can be changed through the editor. Will look into it when I finish downloading.

Joined: Sep 2017
B
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
B
Joined: Sep 2017
I'm deffinately interested in helping in any way because it want this done. I want it to be as close to 5e as possible. Right now I'm working on making waterdeep for the Yaning Portal however the learning curve is real.

Joined: Sep 2017
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Sep 2017
Now that we know some of the limitations in this engine, you guys still think this is a viable project?

Joined: Aug 2014
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Aug 2014
Yes, I still think 90% of the stuff in the OP is possible. It's a lot of work, and not something I'm working on, though.

Joined: May 2017
Location: California
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2017
Location: California
I think that the most important thing about making a D&D mod for DOS 2 would be to capture the feel of D&D, not try to mimic every mechanic and instead use some of the existing DOS 2 mechanics.

I wouldn't try to change the ap system for instance, but I would try to implement an actual saving throw system that doesn't have anything to do with armor values, tweak the DOS skills to resemble similar ones in D&D, and tone down the super inflated numbers that occur as the characters level up. I'd probably dump physical and magical armor if possible and use resistances instead, such as physical resistances added to armor and block % on shields, along with applicable elemental resistances.

I don't think there's any point in trying to lock characters into specific classes ala D&D and just leave progression up to the individual players and GMs. They can police themselves, no need to waste time trying to figure out how to create specific classes and the like. Skills are much more important, but they don't have to be perfect replicas of the ones in D&D either. And, as much as I dislike cool downs, I don't think it's worth the effort to try and replicate D&D's rest mechanic.

Also, passive skills would be nice if possible (Things like the champions increased crit chance).

So, basically I like your ideas Baardvark. I would just tone down the scale of the project so it's somewhat more maneagable. Probably wouldn't be a terrible idea, should you or anyone else decide to tackle this, to split it up into several self contained mods instead of one big monster sized mod.


Last edited by Ghatt; 22/09/17 02:21 AM.
Joined: Jul 2017
W
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
W
Joined: Jul 2017
I just read a post that you can't reroll new characters after a death. This screws everythign up for a long term campaign for me. Hard to make death meaningful.

Joined: May 2017
Location: California
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2017
Location: California
Originally Posted by WMC51
I just read a post that you can't reroll new characters after a death. This screws everythign up for a long term campaign for me. Hard to make death meaningful.


That would indeed be a terrible design choice if true. Haven't actually played gm mode with other players yet, but that would be dissapointing. Also brings up the issue of not being able to add new players part way through a campaign without needing to recreate every other remaining character in a new campaign session file. If true, I suppose you'd just have to use this workaround should a permadeath occur in a campaign.

Joined: Mar 2016
Location: Belgium
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Mar 2016
Location: Belgium
There is no problem with making a new player character at any point during the game. While plain character creation is probably not accessible, you could use the same API that is used for the respec mirror to change the character. The things it can't change (gender, race, skills) could be solved by first offering a dialog in which the player picks what gender and race and standard preset the character should have (like the one offered when you recruit a companion in the main game).

Joined: Jan 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2015
After finally having enough time to finish it, I can just say... rarely had a game I was so torn between amazed and disgusted. Absolutely screams for a mechanic and balance redesign.

So far I have ideas of how to do the classes, talents and skills, but serious doubts arise regarding the GUI and basic mechanics, especially reflecting them in the combat log.

Baardvark, does your statement mean, you're out in general, or just missing the time right now?


Think for yourself! Or others will do it...
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Larian_KVN 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5